Seven years ago, it took just eight words to electrify the party's annual gathering and to show Labour was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. Although not precisely stirring rhetoric, the words met with rapturous applause as delegates rose in spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "Nobody is ruling out remain as an option". But context is everything.
During that darkly divisive time of 2018, straying from his agreed text like this was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in key constituencies above the Europhile sentiments of his party. In just one speech, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who would stand up for the party's base against the leadership he would later replace.
The Shift of Stance & Settled Debates
Since then, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the EU question was resolved by the 2019 general election. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” commitments that ruled out re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, despite polling evidence suggests many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on Europe
However, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a party leader. And, if Europe may not be the central crisis of British politics, the cap which was tightly sealed since Brexit is beginning to rattle again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified their language about the devastation that leaving the EU has caused to the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick to criticize the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was his primary goal and is still his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the scale of the damage, reportedly has left Britain with an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, dwarfs the minor adjustments thus far implemented by the government. The PM's much-touted re-set deal agreed with Brussels in 2024 offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence & Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is one of those trying to overcome entrenched interior ministry opposition to an expansive version of a growth-enabling program for young people allowing youths can move between Britain and Europe to study or work.
The deputy prime minister muses openly about the clear advantages of being in a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, last week voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees UK-EU relations, now present at every cabinet meeting, insists the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there exist avenues to work around them. A proposal involves announce the start of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the next manifesto, with implementation only if securing a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Doubts
However, Starmer has lately been damping it all down again by warning a return to a European customs area could undermine the trade pacts with the US, which he views as key accomplishments of his premiership.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- First, he thinks a customs pact is now significantly more difficult because his ministers actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous sectors, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price set for the UK to join the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure in talks has convinced UK negotiators that European nations have little interest in cutting special deals to the UK than in proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by key advisors in Downing Street as a reason for Britain to keep its distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy and Geopolitical Considerations
This strange and concerning document claims Europe is threatened by cultural extinction because of Muslim migration. It includes a single mention of the UK, placed beside a proposal that the US government may interfere in British politics to encourage the growth of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from concluding that this renders the US an unreliable partner, ministers is worried that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by endangering precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation & The Ghost of 2018
All of which returns us to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not an attempt to become leader but merely an attempt to preserve the “option” of remain being on the ballot paper. In fact, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office note that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate in any leadership election, is part of a group of cabinet ministers signaling they want to go further on Europe.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a future race to replace Starmer, maintain she refuses to comment on her position on a customs union as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Danger & A Prudent Memory
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be prudent of him to recall the effect just a few words had for him in 2018. Potential pathways for a major proposal on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
